i

Design of a 60 MW
Coal Power Plant

A Feasibility Study

Presented to

Dr. Feliciano B. Alagao

Department of Mechanical Engineering
College of Engineering and Technology, MSU-IIT

In partial fulfillment
Of the requirements for the course
Power Plant Design Engineering

CHRISTIAN JAY A. UAYAN

October 2020
 ii

ABSTRACT

A site in Agusan del Sur was evaluated for its feasibility in putting up a coal-powered

thermal station to supply the energy demand of the province as well as the neighboring province

of Surigao del Sur. The plant was to supply the base-load requirement of 60 MW providing

electricity to different types of consumers such as residential, commercial and industrial.

Efficiency of the conversion of fuel into desirable work was determined and the designs for

components such as condenser, heater, pumps and exhaust system were carefully considered.
 iii

This humble work is dedicated to my beloved family

and to our Almighty God.

 iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

TITLE PAGE…………………………………………………………………………..i

ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………...ii

DEDICATION………………………………………………………………………..iii

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Geographic Scope 1

1.2 Geographic Profile 1

1.3 Proposed Location of the Plant 1

2. METHODOLOGY

2.1 Design of the Steam System and the Turbine 3

2.2 Design of the Condenser 14

2.3 Design of the Closed Heaters 18

2.4 Evaluation of the Exhaust Gases 24

2.5 Design of the Coal System 29

2.6 Flue Gas Cleaning 32

2.7 Design of the Feedwater System and Pump Ratings 34

2.8 Design of the Air Preheater 39

2.9 Design of the Draft Fans 41

2.10 Design of the Chimney 44

REFERENCES
 1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Geographic Scope

Agusan del Sur consists of 13 municipalities and 1 city while Surigao del Sur has 17

municipalities and 2 cities. Approximate land area of Agusan del Sur is 9,990 square kilometers

and for Surigao del Sur, only 4,933 square kilometers. Former of the provinces is currently

served by Agusan del Sur Electric Cooperative, Inc. (ASELCO) distribution utility while the

latter is served by two utilities namely: Surigao del Sur I Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SURSECO

I) and Surigao del Sur II Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SURSECO II).

1.2 Geographic Profile

ASELCO is serving the whole Agusan del Sur province and mostly comprises of

residential customers numbering to 101,621. SURSECO I is rendering its service throughout

the second district from Barobo municipality down to Lingig. SURSECO II on the other hand

extends its service from Lianga municipality up to Carrascal. Both provinces are also

dominated by residential customers numbering to 68,353 and 55,821, respectively.

1.3 Proposed Location of the Plant

The site will be located behind the premises of Philippine Normal University, Agusan

Campus in Bahbah, Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur and is situated alongside the Gibong River.

The estimated land area is 10 hectares and the perimeter is 1.39 kilometers. The selection of

the plant site was considered carefully by the following factors.

1.3.1 Heat Sink

 2

Heat sink for the coal power plant is chosen to be the Gibong River due to its moderate

volume and continuous flow to the east ocean of Lianga. Bays of eastern Surigao del Sur are

not suitable because of existing beaches and eco-tourism conflict.

1.3.2 Feedwater Source

The feedwater is selected to be natural water treated with chlorine collected from Mt.

Magdiwata as managed by the San Francisco Water District. The treatment of chlorine prevents

pathogens and makes the water potable.

1.3.3 Combustion Fuel Source

The source of coal that will be fed into the furnace is outsourced from Lingig, Surigao

del Sur which has abundant deposits of coal. Sub-bituminous type of coal is more common to

the area.

1.3.4 Combustion Products Circulation

Desired location is not densely populated compared to other municipalities and the

nearby presence of forest is very ideal to the circulation of the combustion gases.
 3

CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

2.1 Design of the Steam System and the Turbine

The power plant is to supply 60 MW rated load and is composed of steam generator,

turbine, surface condenser, one open feedwater heater, four closed feedwater heaters and four

traps. States are labelled in Figure 2.1 and corresponding mass fractions are designated by the

use of unity and variables. Heat and work input are also identified in the figure and the direction

of the medium is determined by arrows.

𝑾̇𝑻,𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍
1
Turbine
(1-v-w-x-y-z)
(1)
7

2
(v)
3
𝑸̇𝒊𝒏 6 𝑸̇𝒐𝒖𝒕
Steam (w) 5 (z) Condenser
Generator 4
(y)
(x)

(1) (1-v-w-x)

8
15

(1)

14 13 12 11 10 9
Open
Heater

2a 2b 3a 𝑾̇𝑷𝟏 3b 5a 5b 6a 𝑾̇𝑷𝟐 6b
(y) (v+w) (y) (y+z)

Figure 2.1 Components of the Steam System

 4

Steam was used as a working fluid in the design for the Rankine cycle. Certain

considerations were made upon designing the system. It is noted that the turbine should not

accumulate 10 percent moisture in the exhaust. According to Frederick Morse in his book

entitled ‘Power Plant Engineering,’ for a 60 000 kW turbine-generator rating, the preferred

standard throttle pressure and temperature are 59.8 kg/cm2 and 482°C, respectively and the

standard exhaust pressure is 38.1 mm Hg (abs).

98.0665 𝑘𝑃𝑎
𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒: 𝑃1 = 59.8 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚2 ( ) + 101.325 𝑘𝑃𝑎
1 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚2

𝑃1 = 5965.70 𝑘𝑃𝑎

0.1333224 𝑘𝑃𝑎
𝐸𝑥ℎ𝑎𝑢𝑠𝑡 𝑃𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒: 𝑃7 = 38.1 𝑚𝑚 𝐻𝑔 ( ) = 5.08 𝑘𝑃𝑎
1 𝑚𝑚 𝐻𝑔

𝑇ℎ𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒: 𝑇1 = 482°𝐶

In order to simplify the analysis, assumptions were also provided relating to the

function of individual components. The operation is assumed to be steady state such that there

should be no changes in the amount of working fluid flowing around the cycle. Blade efficiency

for pressure compounded staging is 90 percent with velocity ratio of 0.45. The rotation and

leakage allowance was assumed to be uniform at averaged value of 3.5 percent. Using the blade

efficiency and rotation and leakage allowance, the stage efficiency was determined as:

𝜂𝑠 = 0.94 𝑥 𝐵𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 − 𝑟𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒

𝜂𝑠 = 0.94(0.90) − 0.035 = 81.1 %

Pump efficiencies were also assumed as 75 percent for pump 1 and 40 percent for pump

2. Throttling was held as isenthalpic process implying that the enthalpy for the steam entering

the trap is the same as enthalpy leaving. For closed heaters, terminal temperature differences

(TTD) were provided to account for the anticipated temperature difference of liquid exiting the
 5

small tubes and the liquid exiting the heater surface. From left to right, the TTD of the closed

heaters are -2.5°C, -1.5°C, -0.5°C and 0.5°C. Referring to Figure 2.2, it is also assumed that

the states 8, 6a, 5a, 12, 3a and 2a are at the saturated liquid curve.

T (°C)
1
482.00

2
5965.7 kPa 2s
275.21

15 3054.6 kPa
234.86 3
2a 3s
14 3054.6 kPa
194.52 13 3a 2b
13s 4s 4
12 531.89 kPa
154.18
3b
11 162.88 kPa
113.84 5
5a 5s
10 36.24 kPa
73.50
9 6a 5b 6s 6
9s
5.08 kPa
33.16
8 6b 7s 7

s (kJ/kg-K)

Figure 2.2 T-s Diagram for the Regenerative Steam Cycle

Uniform distribution of the temperature across the steam generator, heaters and the

condenser is preferred and the optimum fraction saturation temperature was determined. Using

Steam Calculator app,

𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑃1 ) = 275°𝐶 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑃7 ) = 33.16°𝐶

𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑃1 ) − 𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 (𝑃7 ) 275.21 − 33.16

∆𝑇 = = = 40.34°𝐶
𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑠 + 1 5+1

The kinetic energy from the turbine is converted to electrical energy by the use of

generator. To calculate the desired generator efficiency, assuming full load operation, the

formula is presented as:

 6

0.055 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔
𝜂𝑔𝑒𝑛 = 0.98 − 𝑥
3 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑘𝑊 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑
√
1000

0.055 60
𝜂𝑔𝑒𝑛 = 0.98 − 𝑥 = 0.9660
3 60000 60
√
1000

Power that is generated by the generator is the finished output of the whole thermal

plant. However, this does not mean that this is equal to the power produced by the steam

system. The losses should be accounted for the efficiency of the generator as well as the

mechanical losses due to friction as represented in the following diagram:

Generator
Mechanical
ngen= 96.6 %

𝑾̇𝑻,𝑨𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍 =
𝑾̇𝑩𝒓 = 62.1118 MW 𝑾̇𝒆 = 60 MW
62.4991 MW

Figure 2.3 Conversion of Power from Mechanical to Electrical System

5.0 5.0
𝐹𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 = %(𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑛𝑔) = %(60) = 0.3873 𝑀𝑊
√𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑘𝑊 √60 000
( 1000 ) ( 1000 )

2.1.1 Finding the Thermodynamic Properties

Referring again to Figure 2.2, the properties of the individual state points are required

in order to determine the heat and work inputs and outputs. Pressure (kPa), temperature (°C),

specific enthalpy (kJ/kg) and specific entropy (kJ/kg-K) are usually present in the compressed

liquid and superheated vapor region and a property which is quality (x) is added for the state

points that are enclosed in the saturation curve.

A detailed list of the five properties are provided in Table 2.1 for all the states. The

processes indicated by the dashed lines are for isentropic turbines and pumps. The states
 7

resulting from these processes are labeled with letter ‘s’ in the subscript. Instead of plotting

with these states, it is recommended to use actual state points which considers the efficiency

of the pumps and turbine.

State Temperature Pressure Specific Specific Quality (x)

(T), in °C (P), in kPa Enthalpy (h), Entropy (h),
in kJ/kg in kJ/kg-k
1 482 5965.7 3380.4 6.8292 Superheated
2s 375.62 3054.6 3174.7 6.8292 Superheated
2 392.54 3054.6 3213.58 6.8884 Superheated
3s 281.53 1384.3 3000.4 6.8884 Superheated
3 299.66 1384.3 3040.69 6.9598 Superheated
4s 185.05 531.89 2821.6 6.9598 Superheated
4 204.07 531.89 2863.01 7.0483 Superheated
5s 113.84 162.88 2639.9 7.0483 0.9743
5 116.28 162.88 2702.06 7.2088 Superheated
6s 73.5 36.24 2460.9 7.2088 0.9263
6 73.5 36.24 2540.92 7.4398 0.9608
7s 33.16 5.08 2270.8 7.4398 0.8801
7 33.16 5.08 2375.15 7.7806 0.9232
8 33.16 5.08 138.95 0.48011 0
9s 33.17 531.89 139.46 0.48011 Compressed
9 33.23 531.89 139.63 0.48087 Compressed
10 73 531.89 305.99 0.99115 Compressed
11 114.34 531.89 480.02 1.4666 Compressed
12 154.18 531.89 650.33 1.8843 0
13s 154.8 5965.7 656.27 1.8843 Compressed
13 156.88 5965.7 665.18 1.9053 Compressed
14 196.02 5965.7 836.45 2.2862 Compressed
15 237.36 5965.7 1025.3 2.6718 Compressed
2a 234.86 3054.6 1013.1 2.6548 0
2b 194.52 1384.3 1013.1 2.6752 0.0945
 8

3a 194.52 1384.3 827.77 2.2789 0

3b 154.18 531.89 827.77 2.2996 0.0845
5a 113.84 162.88 477.64 1.4609 0
5b 73.5 36.24 477.64 1.4878 0.0731
6a 73.5 36.24 307.69 0.99753 0
6b 33.16 5.08 307.69 1.031 0.0697
Table 2.1 Thermodynamic Properties of All States in the T-s Diagram

The actual turbine has stage efficiency while bleeding some of the steam through the

heaters, whereas the isentropic turbine does not consider this effect. When the process ends up

inside the saturation curve, a moisture penalty is introduced that is going to be subtracted from

the stage efficiency. Calculation for the enthalpies of the actual turbine processes are shown in

the following:

ℎ1 − ℎ2 3380.4 − ℎ2
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.811 = → ℎ2 = 3213.58 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ1 − ℎ2𝑠 3380.4 − 3174.7

ℎ 2 − ℎ3 3213.58 − ℎ3
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.811 = → ℎ3 = 3040.69 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ2 − ℎ3𝑠 3213.58 − 3000.4

ℎ 3 − ℎ4 3040.69 − ℎ4
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.811 = → ℎ4 = 2863.01 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ3 − ℎ4𝑠 3040.69 − 2821.6

For state 5s:

ℎ4 − ℎ5𝑠
𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦: ∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 𝑥5𝑠 ) +
3490

2863.01 − 2639.9
∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 0.9743) + = 0.0896
3490

𝜂𝑠 = 0.811 − 0.0896 = 0.7214

ℎ 4 − ℎ5 2863.01 − ℎ5
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.7214 = → ℎ5 = 2702.06 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ4 − ℎ5𝑠 2863.01 − 2639.9
 9

For state 6s:

ℎ5 − ℎ6𝑠
𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦: ∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 𝑥6𝑠 ) +
3490

2702.06 − 2460.9
∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 0.9263) + = 0.1428
3490

𝜂𝑠 = 0.811 − 0.1428 = 0.6682

ℎ 5 − ℎ6 2702.06 − ℎ6
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.6682 = → ℎ6 = 2540.92 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ5 − ℎ6𝑠 2702.06 − 2460.9

For state 7s:

ℎ6 − ℎ7𝑠
𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦: ∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 𝑥7𝑠 ) +
3490

2540.92 − 2270.8
∆𝜂𝑠 = (1 − 0.8801) + = 0.1973
3490

𝜂𝑠 = 0.811 − 0.1973 = 0.6137

ℎ 6 − ℎ7 2540.92 − ℎ7
𝜂𝑠 = → 0.6137 = → ℎ7 = 2375.15 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ6 − ℎ7𝑠 2540.92 − 2270.8

Likewise, the pumps considered in the design are not isentropic but rather have their

efficiencies. Noting that the efficiencies for pumps 1 and 2 are 0.75 and 0.40, respectively, the

efficiencies for the actual state points of the pumping processes are calculated as:

ℎ9𝑠 − ℎ8 139.46 − 138.95

𝜂𝑃1 = → 0.75 = → ℎ9 = 139.63 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ9 − ℎ8 ℎ9 − 138.95

ℎ13𝑠 − ℎ12 656.27 − 650.33

𝜂𝑃2 = → 0.40 = → ℎ13 = 665.18 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
ℎ13 − ℎ12 ℎ9 − 650.33

2.1.2 Solving for the Mass Flow Rate of Each State

 10

Given the complete data for properties of individual states, the mass flow rates can be

determined by first getting the mass fractions labelled as variables. Using energy balance for

each heater from left to right, the mass fractions were gradually identified.

Control Volume: Closed Heater 1

2 (v) 0 = 𝑣 (ℎ2 − ℎ2𝑎 ) + (ℎ14 − ℎ15 )

(1)
ℎ15 − ℎ14 1025.3 − 836.45
(1) 𝑣= =
ℎ2 − ℎ2𝑎 3213.58 − 1013.1
15 14

𝑚̇2
2a (v) 𝑣 = 0.0858 =
𝑚̇1

Figure 2.4 Closed Heater 1 Control Volume

Control Volume: Closed Heater 2

3 (w) 0 = (ℎ13 − ℎ14 ) + 𝑤ℎ3 + 𝑣ℎ2𝑏 − (𝑣 + 𝑤)ℎ3𝑎

(1) (1) 0 = (665.18 − 836.45) + 3040.69𝑤 + (0.0858)(1013.1)

14 13 − (0.0858 + 𝑤)(827.77)

(v) 2b
𝑚̇3
3a (v+w) 𝑤 = 0.0702 =
𝑚̇1

Figure 2.5 Closed Heater 2 Control Volume

Control Volume: Open Heater

4 (x) 0 = 𝑥ℎ4 + (𝑣 + 𝑤)ℎ3𝑏 + (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 )ℎ11 − ℎ12

(1) (1-v-w-x) 0 = 2863.01𝑥 + (0.0858 + 0.0702)(827.77)

Open
12
Heater 11 + (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 𝑥 )(480.02) − 650.33

3b (v+w)
𝑚̇4
𝑥 = 0.0487 =
𝑚̇1

Figure 2.6 Open Heater Control Volume

 11

Control Volume: Closed Heater 3

5 (y) 0 = 𝑦(ℎ5 − ℎ5𝑎 ) + (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 )(ℎ10 − ℎ11 )

(1-v-w-x) (1-v-w-x) 0 = 𝑦(2702.06 − 477.64)

11 10 + (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 0.0487)(305.99

5a (y) − 480.02)

Figure 2.7 Close Heater 3 Control Volume

𝑚̇5
𝑦 = 0.0622 =
𝑚̇1

Control Volume: Closed Heater 4

6 (2) 0 = (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 )(ℎ9 − ℎ10 ) + 𝑧ℎ6 + 𝑦ℎ5𝑏 − (𝑦 + 𝑧)ℎ6𝑎

(1-v-w-x) (1-v-w-x) 0 = (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 0.0487)(139.63 − 305.99)

10 9 + 2540.92𝑧 + (0.0622)(477.64)

(y) 5b 6a (y+z) − (0.0622 + 𝑧)(307.69)

Figure 2.8 Close Heater 4 Control Volume

𝑚̇6
𝑧 = 0.0545 =
𝑚̇1

In order to get the mass flow rate of state 1, we consider control volume for turbine and

equate the actual work produced to the enthalpies entering and leaving the system.

Control Volume: Turbine

1 𝑾̇𝑻,𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒖𝒂𝒍
Turbine
(1)

2 3 4 5 6 7
(1-v-w-x-y-z)
(v) (w) (x) (y) (z)

Figure 2.9 Turbine Control Volume

𝑊̇𝑇,𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙
= ℎ1 − 𝑣ℎ2 − 𝑤ℎ3 − 𝑥ℎ4 − 𝑦ℎ5 − 𝑧ℎ6 − (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 − 𝑦 − 𝑧)ℎ7
𝑚̇1
 12

62499.1
= 3380.4 − (0.0858)(3213.58) − (0.0702)(3040.69) − (0.0487)(2863.01)
𝑚̇1

− (0.0622)(2702.06) − (0.0545)(2540.92)

− (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 0.0487 − 0.0622 − 0.0545)(2375.15)

𝑚̇1 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

Hence, with the use of the mass fractions and the initial mass flow rate, the other mass

flow rates can now be determined. Solutions were straightforward and the results are tabulated

as follows:

State Mass Flow Rate State Mass Flow Rate

(kg/s) (kg/s)
1 74.9871 13 74.9871
2 6.4339 14 74.9871
3 5.2641 15 74.9871
4 3.6519 2a 6.4339
5 4.6642 2b 6.4339
6 4.0868 3a 11.698
7 50.8862 3b 11.698
8 59.6372 5a 4.6642
9 59.6372 5b 4.6642
10 59.6372 6a 8.751
11 59.6372 6b 8.751
12 74.9871
Table 2.2 Mass Flow Rates of Individual States in the Steam System

2.1.3 Evaluation of the Steam System

The performance of the steam cycle is assessed by determining the thermal efficiency.

Given the values of the enthalpies and the mass flow rates, the heat and work inputs and outputs

can now be solved.

 13

Per Unit Mass Basis

Turbine Work:

𝑤𝑇 = ℎ1 − 𝑣ℎ2 − 𝑤ℎ3 − 𝑥ℎ4 − 𝑦ℎ5 − 𝑧ℎ6 − (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 − 𝑦 − 𝑧)ℎ7

𝑤𝑇 = 3380.4 − (0.0858)(3213.58) − (0.0702)(3040.69) − (0.0487)(2863.01)

− (0.0622)(2702.06) − (0.0545)(2540.92)

− (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 0.0487 − 0.0622 − 0.0545)(2375.15)

𝑤𝑇 = 833.4647 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔

Total Pump Work:

𝑤𝑃 = 𝑤𝑃1 + 𝑤𝑃2 = (ℎ13 − ℎ12 ) + (1 − 𝑣 − 𝑤 − 𝑥 )(ℎ9 − ℎ8 )

𝑤𝑃 = (665.18 − 650.33) + (1 − 0.0858 − 0.0702 − 0.0487)(139.63 − 138.95)

𝑤𝑃 = 15.3908 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔

Boiler Heat Input:

𝑞𝑖𝑛 = ℎ1 − ℎ15 = 3380.4 − 1025.3 = 2355.1 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔

Thermal Efficiency:

𝑤𝑇 − 𝑤𝑃 833.4647 − 15.3908
𝜂𝑚 = = = 34.74 %
𝑞𝑖𝑛 2355.1

Combined Efficiency:

𝜂𝑐 = 𝜂𝑠 𝑥 𝜂𝑚 𝑥 𝜂𝑔𝑒𝑛

𝜂𝑐 = 0.811(0.3474)(0.9660)

𝜂𝑐 = 27.22 %
 14

2.2 Design of the Condenser

Common design for power plant condenser is composed of shell and tube assembly in

which the tubes are aligned parallel to the axis of the elongated shell and are attached in flanges.

This is known as surface condenser and it is a type of heat exchanger that cools down the steam

from the turbine exhaust into liquid condensate in the hotwell below the atmospheric pressure.

Cooling water is introduced into the tubes and the number of these affects the rate of heat

dissipation.

For the condensing unit, certain parameters are to be defined first prior to the

determination of the size. Table 2.3 presents the quantities and assumptions that will be used

including the specification of the tube according to the standard sizes provided by Morse.

Steam Properties: Cooling Water Properties:

𝑚̇7 = 50.8862 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑡𝑑 = 4.4° (terminal temperature difference)
𝑚̇6𝑏 = 8.7510 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑡𝑖 = 20°𝐶 𝑡𝑜 = 28.76°𝐶
𝑚̇8 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑉𝑤 = 2 𝑚/𝑠
ℎ7 = 2375.15 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
Tube Specifications:
ℎ6𝑏 = 307.69 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
𝑑𝑣 = 19.1 𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑡 = 1.24 𝑚𝑚
ℎ8 = 138.95 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
𝑑𝑤 = 16.57 𝑚𝑚 𝑑𝑡 = 2.156 𝑐𝑚2
(𝑛𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛)
′ ′
𝑎𝑣 = 𝜋(19.1 𝑥 10−3 ) = 0.06 𝑚
𝑡𝑖 = 𝑡𝑜 = 33.16°𝐶
Table 2.3 Condenser Initial Parameters and Assumptions

2.2.1 Log Mean Temperature Difference and Heat Rejected

The hot and cold stream temperature difference cannot be arithmetically averaged due

to the fact that this is exponentially decreasing (Cengel, 2006). Thus, the log mean temperature

difference is used to avoid averaging error. Figure 2.10 shows the variation of the temperature

difference inside the condenser. Note that the cooling water outlet temperature is obtained by

subtracting the steam inlet temperature by the terminal temperature difference.

 15

T (°C) 𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:

′
𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑖 ′
33.16
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 33.16 − 20 = 13.16°𝐶
28.76 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑡𝑜

20
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 33.16 − 28.76 = 4.4°𝐶
𝑡𝑖
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 13.16 − 4.4
x 𝜃= = = 8.00°𝐶
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 13.16
Figure 2.10 Temperature Difference Variation ln 𝜃 ln 4.4
𝑚𝑖𝑛

The condenser is a counterflow heat exchanger with the same steam inlet and outlet

temperatures, designated 𝑡𝑖 ′ and 𝑡𝑜 ′ . The cooling water enters the condenser at temperature 𝑡𝑖

and leaves the condenser at temperature 𝑡𝑜 . Note that the direction of the arrows is opposite

with each other.

The heat rejected is calculated by considering condenser as the control volume and

subtracting the enthalpies entering and exiting the system.

𝑞 = 𝑚̇ 7 ℎ7 + 𝑚6𝑏
̇ ℎ6𝑏 − 𝑚̇ 8 ℎ8

̇
𝑞 = 50.8862 (2375.15) + 8.7510(307.69) − 59.6372(138.95)

1 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙 3600 𝑠
𝑞 = 1.1525 𝑥 105 𝑘𝐽/𝑠 ( )( ) = 9.9138 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟
4.1858 𝑘𝐽 1 ℎ𝑟

2.2.2 Finding the Coefficients of Conductance

Four coefficients of conductance will be determined that depends on the medium in

which the heat is progressively transferred. The mediums include vapor, condenser tube, scale

and cooling water. Solutions for these coefficients are presented with particular formulas from

Morse’ book.

111910
𝑉𝑎𝑝𝑜𝑟: 𝑈𝑣 =
𝑞 0.188
(𝐴 )
𝑣
 16

For condenser tubes, assume the material to be made of copper alloy with thermal

conductivity 93.7 kcal/(h m °C).

𝑘𝑡 93.7 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚 °𝐶)

𝑇𝑢𝑏𝑒: 𝑈𝑡 = =
𝑑𝑡 1.24 𝑥 103 𝑚

𝑈𝑡 = 75 564.52 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

An average value for the coefficient of conductance of scale is 14 650 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

when the definite local information is lacking.

𝑆𝑐𝑎𝑙𝑒: 𝑈𝑠 = 14 650 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

The formula for solving the coefficient of conductance for condensing water is

established by Sherwood and Turner as:

𝐽0.24
𝑈𝑤 = 𝑏𝑉𝑤 0.73 ; 𝑏 = 1379.7
𝑑𝑤 0.27

J in the above expression is the water fluidity in reciprocal centipoises taken at an

average cooling water temperature.

20 + 28.76
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 24.38 °𝐶
2

At an average temperature of 24.38 °C, the interpolated dynamic viscosity from Table

12-8 of Morse’ book is 0.9414 cP. Therefore, the conductance coefficient for cooling water can

now be solved.

1 1
𝐽= = = 1.0622 𝑐𝑃−1
𝑣 0.9414 𝑐𝑃

(1.0622)0.24
𝑏 = 1379.7 = 4235.04
(16.57 𝑥 10−3 )0.27

𝐶𝑜𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑊𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟: 𝑈𝑤 = (4235.04)(2)0.73 = 7024.40 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

 17

2.2.3 Convection Heat Transfer Equation and the Condenser Dimensions

Taking into consideration the effects of the four mediums mentioned earlier, a

theoretical formula involving the log mean temperature difference, heat transfer, conductance

coefficients and the tube specifications was established.

𝑞 1 2𝑑𝑣 𝑑𝑣 𝑑𝑣
𝜃= [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 𝑈𝑣 𝑈𝑡 (𝑑𝑤 + 𝑑𝑣 ) 𝑈𝑠 𝑑𝑤 𝑈𝑤 𝑑𝑤

𝐴𝑣 is the total surface area required for the dissipation of heat of the condensing steam.

Substituting the available quantities on the above equation, it is more convenient to solve for
𝑞
the expression 𝐴 first.
𝑣

𝑞 0.188
𝑞 ( 𝐴𝑣 ) 2(19.1) 19.1 19.1
8.00 = [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 111 910 75 564.52(16.57 + 19.1) 14 650(16.57) 7024.40(16.57)

𝑞
= 25 234.36 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)
𝐴𝑣

Rearranging the equation and substituting the value of heat transfer q,

9.9138 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟

𝐴𝑣 = = 3928.65 𝑚2
25 234.36 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)

Introducing the cooling water mass flow rate equation from page 421 of Morse’ book,

𝑞
𝜔𝑤 = ; 𝑐 = 1 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
𝑐(𝑡𝑜 − 𝑡𝑖 )

9.9138 𝑥 107
𝜔𝑤 = = 1.1317 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
1(28.76 − 20)

The number of tubes per pass from the same reference on page 420 is obtained as

𝜔𝑤 1.1317 𝑥 107
𝑛= = = 7290 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠/𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠
(3600 𝑥 103 )𝑎𝑤 𝑉𝑤 (3600 𝑥 103 )(2.156 𝑥 10−4 )(2)
 18

For a one-pass condenser, the individual tube length is determined as

𝐴𝑣 3928.65
𝐿= = = 8.98 𝑚
𝑎𝑣 𝑛 (0.06)(7290)

Due to the large number of tubing, the condenser is decided to be only one-pass.

2.3 Design of the Closed Heaters

The design for the closed feedwater heaters is almost identical to the condenser except

for the log mean temperature difference. Note that the cooling water outlet temperatures for

condensers 1, 2 and 3 underwent negative TTD and exceeded the saturation temperature of the

steam. This will be demonstrated on the following examples.

Tube specifications and water velocity from the condenser analysis will be preserved

such that only the heat transfer, dynamic viscosity and log mean temperature difference will

vary.

2.3.1 Closed Heater 1

T2 = 392.54 °C
2 𝑚̇2 = 6.4339 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
196.02 + 237.36
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 216.69 °𝐶
T15 = 237.36 °C T14 = 196.02 °C 2
𝑚̇15 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑚̇14 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

15 14 At 𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 216.69 °𝐶, according to Engineering

2a T2a = 234.86 °C Toolbox website, 𝑣 = 0.1239 𝑐𝑃

𝑚̇2𝑎 = 6.4339 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

Figure 2.11 Closed Heater 1 with Labels

1 (8.0710)0.24
𝐽= = 8.0710 𝑐𝑃−1 𝑏 = 1379.7 = 6890.17
0.1239 𝑐𝑃 (16.57 𝑥 10−3 )0.27

𝑈𝑤 = (6890.17)(2)0.73 = 11 428.31 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

𝑞 = 𝑚̇2 (ℎ2 − ℎ2𝑎 ) = 6.4339(3213.58 − 1013.1)

 19

1 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙 3600 𝑠
𝑞 = 14 157.67 𝑘𝐽/𝑠 ( )( ) = 1.2176 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟
4.1858 𝑘𝐽 1 ℎ𝑟

1.2176 𝑥 107
𝜔𝑤 = = 2.9453 𝑥 105 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
1(237.36 − 196.02)

T (°C)
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:
𝑡𝑜 ′ 𝑡𝑖 ′
392.54
237.36 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛
234.86 𝑡𝑜
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 234.86 − 196.02 = 38.84°𝐶
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥
196.02 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 392.54 − 237.36 = 155.18°𝐶
𝑡𝑖

x 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 38.84 − 155.18

𝜃= = = 83.99 °𝐶
𝜃 38.84
Figure 2.12 Closed Heater 1 Temperature Difference
ln 𝑚𝑎𝑥 ln
155.18
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛

Convection Heat Transfer Equation:

𝑞 0.188
𝑞 𝐴𝑣 )
( 2(19.1) 19.1 19.1
83.99 = [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 111 910 75 564.52(16.57 + 19.1) 14 650(16.57) 11428.31(16.57)

𝑞
= 290 785.19 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)
𝐴𝑣

1.2176 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟

𝐴𝑣 = = 41.87 𝑚2
290 785.19 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)

2.9453 𝑥 105
𝑛= = 190 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠/𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠
(3600 𝑥 103 )(2.156 𝑥 10−4 )(2)

41.87
𝐿= = 3.67 𝑚
(0.06)(190)

Closed heater 1 is to be designed with 190 tubes of 3.67 m length with only one pass.
 20

2.3.2 Closed Heater 2

T3 = 299.66 °C
3 𝑚̇ = 5.2641 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
3 156.88 + 196.02
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 176.45 °𝐶
T14 = 196.02 °C T13 = 156.88 °C 2
𝑚̇14 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑚̇13 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

14 13 At 𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 176.45 °𝐶, 𝑣 = 0.1535 𝑐𝑃

T2b = 194.52 °C
2b 3a T3a = 194.52 °C
𝑚̇2𝑏 = 6.4339 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑚̇3𝑎 = 11.6980 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
1
𝐽= = 6.5147 𝑐𝑃−1
0.1535 𝑐𝑃
Figure 2.13 Closed Heater 2 with Labels

(6.5147)0.24
𝑏 = 1379.7 = 6544.89
(16.57 𝑥 10−3 )0.27

𝑈𝑤 = (6544.89)(2)0.73 = 10 855.61 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

𝑞 = 𝑚̇3 ℎ3 + 𝑚̇2𝑏 ℎ2𝑏 − 𝑚̇3𝑎 ℎ3𝑎

𝑞 = 5.2641(3040.69) + 6.4339(1013.1) − 11.6980(827.77)

1 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙 3600 𝑠
𝑞 = 12 841.43 𝑘𝐽/𝑠 ( )( ) = 1.1044 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟
4.1858 𝑘𝐽 1 ℎ𝑟

1.1044 𝑥 107
𝜔𝑤 = = 2.8217 𝑥 105 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
1(196.02 − 156.88)

T (°C)
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:
𝑡𝑜 ′ 𝑡𝑖 ′
299.66
196.02 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛
194.52 𝑡𝑜
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 194.52 − 156.88 = 37.64 °𝐶
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥
156.88 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 299.66 − 196.02 = 103.64 °𝐶
𝑡𝑖

x 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 37.64 − 103.64

𝜃= = = 65.16 °𝐶
𝜃 37.64
Figure 2.14 Closed Heater 2 Temperature Difference ln 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ln 103.64
𝑚𝑖𝑛

Convection Heat Transfer Equation:

𝑞 0.188
𝑞 𝐴𝑣 )
( 2(19.1) 19.1 19.1
65.16 = [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 111 910 75 564.52(16.57 + 19.1) 14 650(16.57) 10855.61(16.57)
 21

𝑞
= 224 939.95 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)
𝐴𝑣

1.1044 𝑥 107 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟

𝐴𝑣 = = 49.10 𝑚2
224 939.95 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)

2.8217 𝑥 105
𝑛= = 182 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠/𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠
(3600 𝑥 103 )(2.156 𝑥 10−4 )(2)

49.10
𝐿= = 4.50 𝑚
(0.06)(182)

For a two-pass closed heater,

49.10
𝑛2−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = 2(182 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠) = 364 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠 𝐿2−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = = 2.25 𝑚
(0.06)(364)

Closed heater 2 is to be designed with 364 tubes of 2.25 m length with two passes.

2.3.3 Closed Heater 3

T5 = 116.28 °C
5
𝑚̇5 = 4.6642 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 73 + 114.34
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 93.67 °𝐶
T11 = 114.34 °C T10 = 73 °C 2
𝑚̇11 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑚̇14 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

11 10 At 𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 93.67 °𝐶, 𝑣 = 0.3025 𝑐𝑃

5a T5a = 113.84 °C
𝑚̇5𝑎 = 4.6642 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
1
𝐽= = 3.3058 𝑐𝑃−1
0.3025 𝑐𝑃
Figure 2.15 Closed Heater 3 with Labels

(3.3058)0.24
𝑏 = 1379.7 = 5561.53
(16.57 𝑥 10−3 )0.27

𝑈𝑤 = (5561.53)(2)0.73 = 9224.57 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

𝑞 = 𝑚̇5 (ℎ5 − ℎ5𝑎 ) = 4.6642(2702.06 − 477.64)

1 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙 3600 𝑠
𝑞 = 10 375.14 𝑘𝐽/𝑠 ( )( ) = 8.9231 𝑥 106 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟
4.1858 𝑘𝐽 1 ℎ𝑟
 22

8.9231 𝑥 106
𝜔𝑤 = = 2.1585 𝑥 105 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
1(114.34 − 73)

T (°C)
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:
𝑡𝑜 ′ 𝑡𝑖 ′
116.28
114.34 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛
113.84 𝑡𝑜
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 113.84 − 73 = 40.84 °𝐶
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥
73.00 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 116.28 − 114.34 = 1.94 °𝐶
𝑡𝑖

x 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 40.84 − 1.94

𝜃= = = 12.77 °𝐶
𝜃 40.84
Figure 2.16 Closed Heater 3 Temperature Difference ln 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ln 1.94
𝑚𝑖𝑛

Convection Heat Transfer Equation:

𝑞 0.188
𝑞 𝐴𝑣 )
( 2(19.1) 19.1 19.1
12.77 = [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 111 910 75 564.52(16.57 + 19.1) 14 650(16.57) 9224.57(16.57)

𝑞
= 44 846.72 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)
𝐴𝑣

8.9231 𝑥 106 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟

𝐴𝑣 = = 198.97 𝑚2
44 846.72 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)

2.1585 𝑥 105
𝑛= = 139 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠/𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠
(3600 𝑥 103 )(2.156 𝑥 10−4 )(2)

198.97
𝐿= = 23.86 𝑚
(0.06)(139)

For a five-pass closed heater,

198.97
𝑛5−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = 5(139 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠) = 695 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠 𝐿5−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = = 4.77 𝑚
(0.06)(695)

Closed heater 31 is to be designed with 695 tubes of 4.77 m length with five passes.
 23

2.3.4 Closed Heater 4

T6 = 73.50 °C
6 𝑚̇ = 4.0868 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
6 33.23 + 73
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 53.115 °𝐶
T10 = 73 °C T9 = 33.23 °C 2
𝑚̇10 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 𝑚̇9 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

10 9 At 𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒 = 53.115 °𝐶, 𝑣 = 0.5197 𝑐𝑃

T5b = 73.5 °C T6a = 73.5 °C
5b 6a
𝑚̇6𝑎 = 8.7510 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
𝑚̇5𝑏 = 4.6642 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 1
𝐽= = 1.9242 𝑐𝑃−1
0.5197 𝑐𝑃
Figure 2.17 Closed Heater 4 with Labels

(1.9242)0.24
𝑏 = 1379.7 = 4884.13
(16.57 𝑥 10−3 )0.27

𝑈𝑤 = (4884.13)(2)0.73 = 8101.01 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(ℎ 𝑚2 °𝐶)

𝑞 = 𝑚̇6 ℎ6 + 𝑚̇5𝑏 ℎ5𝑏 − 𝑚̇6𝑎 ℎ6𝑎

𝑞 = 4.0868(2540.92) + 4.6642(477.64) − 8.7510(307.69)

1 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙 3600 𝑠
𝑞 = 9919.45 𝑘𝐽/𝑠 ( )( ) = 8.5312 𝑥 106 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟
4.1858 𝑘𝐽 1 ℎ𝑟

8.5312 𝑥 106
𝜔𝑤 = = 2.1451 𝑥 105 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟
1(73 − 33.23)

T (°C)
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:
′ ′
𝑡𝑜 𝑡𝑖
73.50
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 73.5 − 33.23 = 40.27 °𝐶
73.00 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑡𝑜

32.23
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 73.5 − 73 = 0.5 °𝐶
𝑡𝑖
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 40.27 − 0.5
x 𝜃= = = 9.06 °𝐶
𝜃 40.27
Figure 2.18 Closed Heater 4 Temperature Difference ln 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ln 0.5
𝑚𝑖𝑛

Convection Heat Transfer Equation:

𝑞 0.188
𝑞 𝐴𝑣 )
( 2(19.1) 19.1 19.1
9.06 = [ + + + ]
𝐴𝑣 111 910 75 564.52(16.57 + 19.1) 14 650(16.57) 8101.01(16.57)
 24

𝑞
= 30 465.50 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)
𝐴𝑣

8.5312 𝑥 106 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/ℎ𝑟

𝐴𝑣 = = 280.03 𝑚2
30 465.50 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ)

2.1451 𝑥 105
𝑛= = 138 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠/𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠
(3600 𝑥 103 )(2.156 𝑥 10−4 )(2)

280.03
𝐿= = 33.82 𝑚
(0.06)(138)

For a six-pass closed heater,

280.03
𝑛6−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = 6(138 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠) = 828 𝑡𝑢𝑏𝑒𝑠 𝐿6−𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 = = 5.64 𝑚
(0.06)(828)

Closed heater 4 is to be designed with 828 tubes of 5.64 m length with six passes.

2.4 Evaluation of the Exhaust Gases

The Department of the Interior – U.S. Geological Survey had conducted feasibility

study for introducing coal-water-mix fuels to the Philippines coordinating with the National

Economic and Development Authority (Landis et. al, 1985). The specific site of coal reserve

is chosen to be Bislig City as it is closer to the proposed power plant. Ultimate analysis of the

coal samples was provided in the study.

Coal Quality

Heating Value 7000 – 10 000 Btu/lb (9 600 Btu/lb, July 1983)

Moisture (As received) 8 – 20 %

Ash (As received) 5 – 30 %

Coal Rank Subbituminous B.

Table 2.4 Properties of the Coal Sample to be Used

 25

Ultimate Analysis

C 50.29

H 5.83

O 27.88

N 0.94

S 0.57

A 14.49

Total 100 (%)

Table 2.5 Ultimate Analysis of the Coal Sample

Composition of air was determined through volumetric and weight analyses. Through

volumetric analysis, the mole fraction of Nitrogen gas is found to be 0.79 while for Oxygen it

is 0.21. The ratio of the two quantites is 3.76 moles N2/moles O2. On the other hand, through

weight analysis it was examined that Nitrogen is 77 percent while Oxygen is 23 percent by

mass. Note also that the molecular weight of air is 29 kg/kmol. For standard air, the relative

humidity is 60 percent and the moisture content is 0.013 kg moisture/kg air.

2.4.1 Finding Oxygen Required for Complete Combustion

The individual reactions producing the combustion products is presented in the

following equations and the mass fraction of each element in the ultimate analysis is multiplied

by the corresponding mass fraction of the oxygen and that particular element in the reaction.

Carbon Dioxide:

𝐶 + 𝑂2 → 𝐶𝑂2

12 𝑘𝑔 + 32 𝑘𝑔 = 44 𝑘𝑔
 26

1 𝑘𝑔 + 2.67 𝑘𝑔 = 3.67 𝑘𝑔

Water:

2𝐻2 + 𝑂2 → 2𝐻2 𝑂

4 𝑘𝑔 + 32 𝑘𝑔 = 36 𝑘𝑔

1 𝑘𝑔 + 8 𝑘𝑔 = 9 𝑘𝑔

Sulfur Dioxide:

𝑆 + 𝑂2 → 𝑆𝑂2

32 𝑘𝑔 + 32 𝑘𝑔 = 64 𝑘𝑔

1 𝑘𝑔 + 1 𝑘𝑔 = 2𝑘𝑔

For 1 kg of coal,

2.67 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
𝐶: 0.5029 𝑘𝑔 𝐶 ( ) = 1.3427 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
1 𝑘𝑔 𝐶

8 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
𝐻: 0.0583 𝑘𝑔 𝐻 ( ) = 0.4664 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
1 𝑘𝑔 𝐻

1 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
𝑆: 0.0057 𝑘𝑔 𝑆 ( ) = 0.0057 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2
1 𝑘𝑔 𝑆

1.8148 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2 /𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙

Air-Fuel Ratio

A 15 percent excess air was considered in the design of the exhaust gas system.

Multiplying this to the theoretical air-fuel ratio will obtain the actual air-fuel ratio.
 27

1.8148 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2 1 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟
(𝐴/𝐹 ) 𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 = ( ) = 7.89 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟/ 𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙 0.23 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2

(𝐴/𝐹 )𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = 1.15(7.89 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟/ 𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙) = 9.0735 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟/ 𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙

2.4.2 Analysis of the Combustion Gases

The overall chemical balance is presented on the following equation. Note that the left

side of the equation is composed of the fuel added with air and ignited inorder to produce the

combustion gases on the right side of the equation.

𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙 [𝐶𝐻𝑂𝑁𝑆𝐴] + 𝐴𝑖𝑟 → 𝐶𝑂2 + 𝐻2 𝑂 + 𝑆𝑂2 + 𝑁2

Mass of Each Product in 1 kg of Fuel (Mass Basis)

CO2:

𝐶𝑂2 = 𝐶 + 𝑂2 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)

𝐶𝑂2 = 0.5029 𝑘𝑔 𝐶 + 1.3427 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2 = 1.8456 𝑘𝑔 𝐶𝑂2

H2O:

𝐻2 𝑂𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝐻2 𝑂𝑀𝑒𝑐ℎ. 𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 + 𝐻2 𝑂𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙

0.013 𝑘𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒
𝐻2 𝑂𝑀𝑒𝑐ℎ. 𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 = (𝐴/𝐹 )𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 ( )
𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟

9.0735 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟 0.013 𝑘𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒

𝐻2 𝑂𝑀𝑒𝑐ℎ. 𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 =( )( )
𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙 𝑘𝑔 𝑎𝑖𝑟

𝐻2 𝑂𝑀𝑒𝑐ℎ. 𝑀𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 = 0.1180 𝑘𝑔 𝑚𝑜𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒/𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙

𝐻2 𝑂𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙 = 𝐻 + 𝑂2 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)

 28

𝐻2 𝑂𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙 = 0.0583 𝑘𝑔 𝐻 + 0.4664 𝑂2 = 0.5247 𝑘𝑔 𝐻2 𝑂

𝐻2 𝑂𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 0.1180 + 0.5247 = 0.6427 𝑘𝑔 𝐻2 𝑂

SO2:

𝑆𝑂2 = 𝑆 + 𝑂2 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)

𝑆𝑂2 = 0.0057 𝑘𝑔 𝑆 + 0.0057 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2 = 0.0114 𝑘𝑔 𝑆𝑂2

N2:

𝑁2 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑁2 𝑎𝑖𝑟 + 𝑁2 𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙

1.8148 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2 0.77 𝑘𝑔 𝑁2
𝑁2 𝑎𝑖𝑟 = ( ) = 6.0756 𝑘𝑔 𝑁2 /𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙
𝑘𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑎𝑙 0.23 𝑘𝑔 𝑂2

𝑁2 𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙 = 𝑁 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑡𝑒 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛)

𝑁2 𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑜𝑎𝑙 = 0.0094 𝑘𝑔 𝑁2

𝑁2 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 6.0756 + 0.0094 = 6.085 𝑘𝑔 𝑁2

Number of Moles of Each Product in 1 kg of Fuel (Molar Basis)

1.8456 𝑘𝑔
𝜂𝐶𝑂2 = = 0.0419 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝐶𝑂2
44 𝑘𝑔/𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙

0.6427 𝑘𝑔
𝜂𝐻2 𝑂 = = 0.0357 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝐻2 𝑂
18 𝑘𝑔/𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙

0.0114 𝑘𝑔
𝜂𝑆𝑂2 = = 0.0002 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑆𝑂2
64 𝑘𝑔/𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙
 29

6.085 𝑘𝑔
𝜂𝑁2 = = 0.2173 𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙 𝑁2
28 𝑘𝑔/𝑘𝑚𝑜𝑙

2.4.3 Summary of the Analysis of Combustion Gases

Amounts of combustion gases in mass and molar bases were determined from section

2.4.2. The table below summarizes the results including the percentage of the combustion gases

in molar basis. The analysis was done for 1 kg of coal.

Combustion Mass (kg/kg Molar Mass of No. of Moles % Analysis of

Product coal) Product (kg/kmol) (kmol/kg coal) Combustion Gas

CO2 1.8456 44 0.0419 14.20

H2 O 0.0647 18 0.0357 12.10

SO2 0.0114 64 0.0002 0.07

N2 6.085 28 0.2173 73.64

Total 0.2951 100 (%)

Table 2.6 Combustion Gases Analysis Table

2.5 Design of the Coal System

The coal system is responsible for feeding up fuel into the furnace. It is necessary to

investigate for the amount of fuel being utilized in combustion as well as the mode of transport

of these from the coal piles, into the bunker, pulverizer and finally the furnace.

2.5.1 Mass Flow Rate of Fuel and Air

Acquiring a precise value of the heating value is important in determining the mass of

fuel burnt per unit of time. Citing from the book of Philip Potter entitled ‘Power Plant Theory

and Design,’ a useful empirical formula for estimating the higher heating value of fuel is

defined by the ‘Dulong’s Equation.’

 30

𝑂2
𝐻𝐻𝑉 = 14 600𝐶 + 62 000 (𝐻2 − ) + 4050𝑆
8

Where C, H2, O2 and S are the mass fractions of the corresponding elements involved.

Recalling Table 2.5 for the ultimate analysis of the coal sample, the mass fractions were

substituted on the above equation and the higher heating value denoted by HHV was obtained.

0.2788
𝐻𝐻𝑉 = 14 600(0.5029) + 62 000 (0.0583 − ) + 4050(0.0057)
8

𝐻𝐻𝑉 = 8819.325 𝐵𝑡𝑢/𝑙𝑏

Converting the higher heating value into SI units, it can also be expressed as:

8819.325 𝐵𝑡𝑢 1055.06 𝐽 1 𝑘𝐽 2.2046 𝑙𝑏

𝐻𝐻𝑉 = ( )( )( )
𝑙𝑏 1 𝐵𝑡𝑢 1000 𝐽 1 𝑘𝑔

𝐻𝐻𝑉 = 20 513.62 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔

The generator efficiency is related to the heat input to the boiler and the heat generated

by the coal by the following equation:

𝑚̇1 Δℎ 𝑚̇1 (ℎ1 − ℎ15 )

𝜂𝑔𝑒𝑛 = → 𝑚̇𝑓 =
𝑚̇𝑓 (𝐻𝐻𝑉 ) 𝜂𝑔𝑒𝑛 (𝐻𝐻𝑉 )

74.9871𝑘𝑔/𝑠(3380.4 − 1025.3)𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔
𝑚̇𝑓 = = 8.9120 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
0.9660(20 513.62 𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔)

Thus, the rate of coal feeding was determined to be 8.9120 kg/s. Using the air-fuel mass

ratio, the rate of air required in combustion was also determined as follows:

𝑚̇𝑎 = 𝑚̇𝑓 (𝐴/𝐹 )𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 = 8.9120 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 (9.0735)

𝑚̇𝑎 = 80.8630 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

 31

2.5.2 Conveyor Design for Coal Transport

A flight conveyor is selected as a transport mechanism for coal to be delivered from the

pile into the bunker. The maximum capacity is simply the fuel mass flow rate expressed in

tonnes per hour. For the design, the working area of each flight is to be determined.

8.9120 𝑘𝑔 1 𝑡𝑜𝑛 3600 𝑠

𝑇 = 𝑚̇𝑓 = ( )( ) = 32.0832 𝑡𝑜𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑠/ℎ𝑟
𝑠 1000 𝑘𝑔 ℎ𝑟

The capacity formula is stated in Morse book stated as:

𝑇
𝑇 = 48.055𝐴𝑆 → 𝐴 =
48.055𝑆

Where 𝑇 is the maximum capacity of flight conveyor (tonnes/hr), 𝐴 is the working area

of each flight (m2) and S is the lineal speed of the conveyor (m/min). Assuming that the lineal

speed is kept at 1.5 m/s or 60 m/min, the flight area can then be calculated.

32.0832
𝐴= = 0.0111 𝑚2
48.055(60)

The horsepower required to driveshaft was also determined using the following

relationship:

ℎ𝑝 = 0.000198𝑤𝑓 𝐿𝑆 + 0.002567𝑇𝐿

Where 𝑤𝑓 is the weight of single strand of chains and flight (kg/m), 𝐿 is the conveyor

length (m) and T is the conveyor capacity (tonnes/hr). Suppose the strand weight is selected to

be 5 kg/m and the conveyor length is 10 m, the horsepower is solved as:

ℎ𝑝 = 0.000198(5)(10)(90) + 0.002567(32.0832)(10)

ℎ𝑝 = 1.7146 ℎ𝑝
 32

In terms of kilowatts or kJ/s,

0.7457 𝑘𝑊
𝑊̇𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣𝑒𝑦𝑜𝑟 = 1.7146 ℎ𝑝 ( ) = 1.2786 𝑘𝑊
1 ℎ𝑝

2.5.3 Power Requirement for Pulverizing Coal

A ball mill from Henan ZOOMJO Mining Machine Manufacturing Co., Ltd. Was

selected and the specifications for the model are stated as follows:

Model ∅2100 x 3000

Capacity 6.5 – 36 tonnes/hr

Feeding Size ≤ 25 mm

Discharging Size 0.074 – 0.4 mm

Rotation Speed 23.7 rpm

Motor Power 380 kW

Table 2.7 Specifications of the Selected Ball Mill

2.6 Flue Gas Cleaning

Using a bagtest, sample of gas will be collected to determine the amount of dust and

cinder present. The following parameters were assumed:

Gas inlet velocity 10 m/s

Inlet dimension 30 cm x 180 cm

Gas outlet velocity 7 m/s

Outlet dimension 90 cm x 90 cm

Main flow temperature 270 °C

Sampler temperature 140 °C

 33

Nozzle area 6 cm2

Orifice area 4 cm2

Coefficient 60 %

Table 2.8 Parameters to be Used in Flue Gas Analysis

𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚
𝑁𝑜𝑡𝑒: [ ]
𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚

Required Rate of Flow into Supply:

1000 6000
𝑉̇ = 𝐴𝑣 → 𝑉𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦
̇ = 6 𝑐𝑚2 [ ] 𝑐𝑚/𝑠 = [ ] 𝑐𝑚3 /𝑠
700 4200

Required Rate of Flow through Orifice:

𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑟 140 + 273.15 6000

̇
𝑉𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒 = ̇
[𝑉𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑦 ]= [ ] 𝑐𝑚3 /𝑠 = [4563.93] 𝑐𝑚3 /𝑠
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑖𝑛 270 + 273.15 4200 3194.75

The apparatus must be adjusted for manometer readings indicated by the following

formula:

2
𝑦 = 114 050(𝑉̇𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒 ) 𝑐𝑚 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

−6 2
2.3756]
𝑦 = 114 050 [4563.93 𝑥 10−6 ] 𝑐𝑚 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 = [ 𝑐𝑚 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
3194.75 𝑥 10 1.1640

Suppose the collection of dust samples in upstream and downstream taken from 30 mins

run gives the following values:

𝑚𝑢𝑝𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚 = 0.0816 𝑘𝑔 𝑜𝑟 81.6 𝑔

𝑚𝑑𝑜𝑤𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑚 = 0.0154 𝑘𝑔 𝑜𝑟 15.4 𝑔

0.0816 − 0.0154
𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = = 81.13 %
0.0816

Mass Flow Rate of Solids into Sampler:

 34

1 81.6
𝑚̇𝑆𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑟 = [ ] 𝑔 = [0.0453] 𝑔/𝑠
60 𝑠 15.4 0.0086
30 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑠 (1 𝑚𝑖𝑛)

Gas Density:

0.0453 𝑔/𝑠
𝐸𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟: 3 = 7.55 𝑔/𝑚3
1
6000 𝑐𝑚3 ( )
100 𝑐𝑚

0.0086 𝑔/𝑠
𝐿𝑒𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝐶𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟: 3 = 2.05 𝑔/𝑚3
1
4200 𝑐𝑚3 (100 𝑐𝑚)

Total Flow of Solids:

1𝑚 2
2
1 𝑘𝑔 60 𝑠
𝑚̇ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 𝑣𝐴𝜌 = 10 𝑚/𝑠 [(30 𝑥 180)𝑐𝑚 ( ) ] [7.55 𝑔/𝑚3 ( )( )]
100 𝑐𝑚 1000 𝑔 1 𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑚̇ 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 2.45 𝑘𝑔/𝑚𝑖𝑛

Hopper Collection:

60 𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑚̇𝐻𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 = 2.45 𝑘𝑔/𝑚𝑖𝑛 ( ) (0.8133)
ℎ𝑟

𝑚̇𝐻𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑒𝑟 = 119.26 𝑘𝑔/ℎ𝑟

2.7 Design of the Feedwater System and Pump Ratings

The feedwater system is responsible for maintaining the mass flow rate of water of the

steam cycle. Assuming that the losses mainly originated from the deconcentration of the

unwanted impurities such as scales, make-up water should be introduced into the feedwater.

Diagram for the feedwater system is provided as follows with heat saving equipment attached

during blowdown to recuperate the rejected heat into the feedwater being introduced.
 35

WS
WS + WB
Upper
Drum
Scales and
Impurities

Feedwater
WB
Make-up Water

ti’ to’
Heat-saving
to Equipment ti Lower
Cooled
Blowdown Drum
hydrometer

Figure 2.19 Feedwater System with Blowdown

2.7.1 Blowdown of the Scales in the Upper Steam Drum

Initially, the natural water to be used as feedwater is treated with chlorine. Due to the

lack of chemical processes to further remove the other unnecessary compounds that may cause

scaling inside the steam drum at higher temperatures, the design is to incorporate blowdown or

deconcentration.

Notation:

WS – weight of steam evaporated Sm – concentration in make-up water (ppm)

WB – weight of blowdown Sf – concentration in feedwater (ppm)

m – fraction of make-up in feedwater ti, to – heat exchanger blowdown water

(remainder is condensate) temperatures

Sb – concentration in boiler (ppm) ti’, to’ – heat exchanger feedwater

temperatures

Balance of Solids:

𝑆𝑏 𝑊𝐵 = 𝑚𝑆𝑚 (𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 ) 𝑜𝑟 𝑆𝑏 𝑊𝐵 = 𝑆𝑚 (𝑚𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 ) → 𝑚 𝑖𝑠 𝑓𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑜𝑓 𝑊𝑠

𝑆𝑏 𝑊𝐵 = 𝑆𝑓 (𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 )

Boiler Concentration with SiO2:

 36

𝑆𝑏 (𝑆𝑖 ) = 161.88 − 0.513 𝑥 (𝑇𝑠𝑎𝑡 ) 𝑝𝑝𝑚

Finding the Fraction of Make-up Water:

𝑆𝑏 𝑊𝐵 = 𝑚𝑆𝑚 (𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 )

Given the quantities,

𝑊𝑆 = 𝑚̇1 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

𝑆𝑏 (𝑆𝑖 ) = 161.88 − 0.513 𝑥 (275.21) 𝑝𝑝𝑚 = 20.69727 𝑝𝑝𝑚

The concentration of ground water or make-up water from San Francisco Water District

was measured as 𝑆𝑚 = 300 𝑝𝑝𝑚 (ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑛𝑒𝑠𝑠). Suppose the rate of blowdown is:

𝑊𝐵 = 6 % (𝑊𝑆 ) = 0.06(74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠) = 4.499226 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

Therefore, the fraction of make-up water is:

𝑆𝑏 𝑊𝐵 (20.69727 𝑝𝑝𝑚)(4.499226 𝑘𝑔/𝑠)

𝑚= = = 0.003905
𝑆𝑚 (𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 ) 300 𝑝𝑝𝑚 (74.9871 + 4.499226)𝑘𝑔/𝑠

Mass Flow Rate of Make-up Water:

𝑚̇𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒−𝑢𝑝 = 𝑚(𝑊𝑆 + 𝑊𝐵 ) = 0.003905(74.9871 + 4.499226)𝑘𝑔/𝑠

𝑚̇𝑚𝑎𝑘𝑒−𝑢𝑝 = 0.3104 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

2.7.2 Pump Rating

Two pumps were used in the steam system to circulate the steam inside the major

components and the pipes. Pump 1 is responsible for delivering steam of 100 percent mass flow

rate into the steam generator that passes through closed heaters 1 and 2 and also raising the
 37

pressure. Pump 2 is responsible for bringing up the low pressure of the condensate into a

specified pressure inside the heater, passing closed heaters 3 and 4. Mass fraction of the steam

compressed by the Pump 2 is not unity.

Brake Power and Indicated Power Formulas:

𝑏𝑝
𝑏𝑝 = 𝜀 𝑖𝑝 → 𝑖𝑝 = ; 𝜀 − 𝑝𝑢𝑚𝑝 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦
𝜀

Solving for the Pump Work:

̇
𝑃𝑢𝑚𝑝 1: 𝑊𝑃1 = 𝑚̇1 (ℎ13 − ℎ12 )

𝑊̇𝑃1 = 74.9871 𝑘𝑔/𝑠(665.18 − 650.33)𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔 = 1113.5584 𝑘𝑊

̇
𝑃𝑢𝑚𝑝 2: 𝑊𝑃2 = 𝑚̇8 (ℎ9 − ℎ8 )

𝑊̇𝑃2 = 59.6372 𝑘𝑔/𝑠(139.63 − 650.33)𝑘𝐽/𝑘𝑔 = 40.5533 𝑘𝑊

For Pump 1:

A multistage boiler feed pump from Zoom Pumps website of model 600 – 60 x 8 was

selected with quantities from its characteristic curve determined as:

𝜀𝑃1 = 0.75 𝑏𝑝𝑃1 = 900 𝑘𝑊

Therefore, the power requirement for pump 1 can be solved directly represented as

indicated power.

900 𝑘𝑊
𝑖𝑝𝑃1 = = 1200 𝑘𝑊 ≅ 1113.5584 𝑘𝑊
0.75
 38

Figure 2.20 Characteristic Curve of Pump 1

For Pump 2:

Likewise, a multistage boiler feed pump from Zoom Pumps was selected but of

different model which is 12 – 50 x 5.

Figure 2.21 Characteristic Curve of Pump 2

𝜀𝑃2 = 0.40 𝑏𝑝𝑃2 = 18.5 𝑘𝑊

 39

Also, the power requirement for pump 2 can be solved directly.

18.5 𝑘𝑊
𝑖𝑝𝑃2 = = 46.25 𝑘𝑊 ≅ 40.5533 𝑘𝑊
0.40

2.8 Design of the Air Preheater

An air preheater is an auxiliary device which improves thermal efficiency by heating

the air using the combustion gases which are ducted to a heat exchanging system before

introducing into the combustion chamber. Installment of such device is to be taken into

consideration because of the first cost and the arrangement of the equipment.

If permitted, the design of the air preheater will consist of 50 m thin-walled tubes of

length of 4 m each. 48 tubes will be installed at a center distance 10 mm relative to each other.

The air passage will be baffled with 5 passes and the heat transfer is via counterflow with the

combustion gases as illustrated on the following figure.

Given Quantities and Assumptions:

Flue Gas In

Heated Air 𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 (𝐺) = 26 860 𝑘𝑔/(ℎ𝑟 𝑚2 )

𝑚̇𝑎 = 0.9𝑚̇𝑔

𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒: 𝑡𝑖 ′ = 370 °𝐶

𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒: 𝑡𝑖 = 16 °𝐶

( 𝑡𝑖 ′ − 𝑡𝑜 ′ ) = 140 °𝐶
Air In
Specific Heats:
To Chimney
𝐶𝑝𝑔 = 0.25 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/𝑘𝑔 °𝐶
Figure 2.22 Schematic Diagram for the Proposed Air Preheater

𝐶𝑝𝑎 = 0.24 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/𝑘𝑔 °𝐶

Solving for the Heat Transfer Coefficient

 40

From Eq. 9-14 of Morse’ book, an empirical method of solving for the heat transfer

coefficient U was devised and given the value of constants by Kreissinger,

𝐴 = 1.95 𝐵 = 0.00045

𝑈 = 𝐴 + 𝐵𝐺 = 1.95 + 0.00045(26 860) = 14.037 𝑘𝑐𝑎𝑙/(𝑚2 ℎ °𝐶)

Rise of Air Temperature:

140 0.25
(𝑡𝑜 − 𝑡𝑖 ) = ( ) = 162 °𝐶
0.9 0.24

T (°C)
𝐿𝑜𝑔 𝑀𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝐷𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒:
𝑡𝑜 ′ 𝑡𝑖 ′
370.00
𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛
230.00 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 230 − 16 = 214 °𝐶
178.00
𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑡𝑜
16.00 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 370 − 178 = 192 °𝐶
𝑡𝑖

x 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝜃𝑚𝑖𝑛 214 − 192

𝜃= = = 203 °𝐶
𝜃 214
Figure 2.23 Air Preheater Temperature Difference
ln 𝜃𝑚𝑎𝑥 ln 192
𝑚𝑖𝑛

Total Surface Area:

𝐴𝑣 = 𝜋𝑑𝐿𝑛 = 𝜋(0.050 𝑚)(4 𝑚)(48) = 30.16 𝑚2

Finding the Gas Mass Flow Rate:

370 + 230
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑎𝑠: 𝑡 ′ 𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 300 °𝐶
2

𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑡 300 °𝐶: 𝜌𝑔 = 0.617 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3

1 ℎ𝑟 𝑚3
𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝑉𝑔 = 26 860 𝑘𝑔/(ℎ𝑟 𝑚2 ) ( )( ) = 12.09 𝑚/𝑠
3600 𝑠 0.617 𝑘𝑔

𝐺𝑎𝑠 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒: 𝑚̇𝑔 = 𝜌𝑔 𝑉𝑔 𝐴𝐶𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠 𝑛

𝑚 1
𝑚̇𝑔 = 0.617 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 (12.09 ) [ 𝜋(0.05)2 (48)] = 0.7030 𝑘𝑔/𝑠
𝑠 4
 41

Temperature Change of the Flue Gas:

3600𝑚̇𝑔 𝑐𝑝𝑔 ∆𝑡 ′ = 𝑈𝐴𝑣 𝜃

𝑈𝐴𝑣 𝜃 𝑈𝐴𝑣 𝜃 14.037(30.16)(203)

∆𝑡 ′ = = = 135.83 °𝐶
3600𝑚̇𝑔 𝑐𝑝𝑔 3600𝑚̇𝑔 𝑐𝑝𝑔 3600(0.7030)(0.25)

Initial assumption of the flue gas temperature difference in the inlet and outlet was

fairly correct which is 140 °𝐶 when compared to the above difference.

2.9 Design of the Draft Fans

From the analysis of the preheater device, the outlet temperature of the preheated air

was determined to be 𝑡𝑜 = 178 °𝐶. The following quantities were also calculated to be used

later in the design of forced and induced draft fans.

16 + 178
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑡𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑖𝑟: 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒 = = 97 °𝐶
2

𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑑𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑡 97 °𝐶: 𝜌𝑎 = 0.954 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3

𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒: 𝑚̇𝑎 = 80.8630 𝑘𝑔/𝑠 (𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑏𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐴𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑦𝑠𝑖𝑠)

Assuming a flow area of 4 m2 inside the combustion chamber,

𝑚̇𝑎 80.8630 𝑘𝑔/𝑠

𝐴𝑖𝑟 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦: 𝑉1 = = = 21.19 𝑚/𝑠
𝜌𝑎 𝐴𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 (0.954 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3 )(4 𝑚2 )

Static Pressure of Air:

Assuming a water plenum of y = 15 cm,

2
997 𝑘𝑔 1𝑚 3
𝑝𝑎 = 𝑝𝑎𝑡𝑚 + 𝑦𝜌 = 1.03323 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚 + 15 𝑐𝑚 ( )( )
𝑚3 100 𝑐𝑚

𝑝𝑎 = 1.0482 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚2
 42

Density of Air:

𝑝𝑎
𝑝𝑎 = 𝜌𝑎 𝑅𝑎 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒 → 𝜌𝑎 =
𝑅𝑎 𝑡𝑎𝑣𝑒

100 𝑐𝑚 2
2
1.0482 𝑘𝑔/𝑐𝑚 ( 1 𝑚 )
𝜌𝑎 = = 0.9680 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3
𝐽 1
(287 𝑘𝑔 − 𝐾 ) ( 𝑚 ) (97 + 273.15)𝐾
9.81 2
𝑠

Velocity Head:

Note that the initial velocity of air from the forced draft fan is 0 m/s. The air then travels

through the fan at uniform velocity of 21.19 m/s passing the air preheater and arriving into the

combustion chamber. Using Bernoulli’s equation,

𝑉1 2 (21.19 𝑚/𝑠)2
𝐻= = = 22.89 𝑚
2𝑔 2(9.81 𝑚/𝑠 2 )

For 22.89 m of air, the draft pressure of the combustion chamber is

𝑘𝑔 1
𝑑1 = 𝐻𝜌𝑠 = 22.89 𝑚 (0.9680 ) ( ) = 2.2158 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
𝑚3 10

2.9.1 Design of the Forced Draft Fan

The configuration of the draft fan is selected to be ‘backwardly curved multivane’

which has manometric efficiency of 𝑛𝑀𝑎𝑛𝑜 = 0.385.

𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑒𝑑

𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 =
𝑛𝑀𝑎𝑛𝑜

2.2158 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 = = 5.6582 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
0.385

Gas Flow Inside the Combustion Chamber:

 43

𝑄1 = 𝑉1 𝐴𝑓𝑙𝑜𝑤 = 21.19 𝑚/𝑠 (4 𝑚2 )

100 𝑐𝑚 3 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ 3 1 𝑓𝑡 3
60 𝑠
𝑄1 = 84.76 𝑚3 /𝑠 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
1𝑚 2.54 𝑐𝑚 12 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 1 𝑚𝑖𝑛

𝑄1 = 1.7960 𝑥 105 𝑓𝑡 3 / 𝑚𝑖𝑛

Forced Draft Fan Static Air Horsepower:

𝑄1 𝑑1 1.7960 𝑥 105 𝑓𝑡 3 / 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (2.2158 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)

ℎ𝑝1 = =
450 450

ℎ𝑝1 = 884.35 ℎ𝑝

0.7457 𝑘𝑊
𝐼𝑛 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑘𝑊: 𝑊̇𝐹1 = 884.35 ℎ𝑝 ( ) = 659.46 𝑘𝑊
1 ℎ𝑝

2.9.2 Design of the Induced Draft Fan

It was assumed that the maintained static draft for the chimney system is 𝑑2 = 2.00 𝑐𝑚,

𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟. Different from the forced draft fan, the configuration selected for the induced fan is

‘forwardly curved multivane’ which has manometric efficiency of 𝑛𝑀𝑎𝑛𝑜 = 1.12.

2.00 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑓𝑡 = = 1.7857 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
1.12

Gas Flow Enclosed in the Chimney:

𝑄2 = 𝑄1 = 1.7960 𝑥 105 𝑓𝑡 3 / 𝑚𝑖𝑛

Induced Draft Fan Static Air Horsepower:

𝑄2 𝑑2 1.7960 𝑥 105 𝑓𝑡 3 / 𝑚𝑖𝑛 (2.00 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟)

ℎ𝑝2 = =
450 450

ℎ𝑝2 = 798.22 ℎ𝑝
 44

0.7457 𝑘𝑊
𝐼𝑛 𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑚𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑘𝑊: 𝑊̇𝐹2 = 798.22 ℎ𝑝 ( ) = 595.23 𝑘𝑊
1 ℎ𝑝

2.10 Design of the Chimney

The structure that ejects the flue gases into the atmosphere is called the chimney. It also

produces draft by heating cold stream of air initially coming from the forced draft fan and the

heated air rises naturally by the convection principle. When the chimney is made of steel, it is

properly called as ‘stack’.

The following parameters derived from previous calculations as well as data coming

from the Engineering Toolbox website will be used in the design of the chimney.

Material Brick

Gas Flow Rate 𝑄2 = 84.76 𝑚3 /𝑠

Static Draft 𝑑2 = 2.00 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

Gas Density at ti’ 𝜌𝑔 = 0.548 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3

Atmospheric Density at 𝒕 = 𝟐𝟓°𝑪 𝜌𝑎𝑡𝑚 = 1.184 𝑘𝑔/𝑚3

Table 2.9 Parameters to be Used in the Chimney Design

Let V be the velocity of gas in the chimney. By Eq. 12-14 of Morse’ book, the required

draft is solved as:

𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑞 = 𝑑2 − 0.004𝑉 2 𝜌𝑔 𝑐𝑚, 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟

𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑞 = 2.00 − 0.004𝑉 2 (0.548) = 2.00 − 0.002192𝑉 2

Draft of Chimney:

𝑉5
𝐷30 = 𝐾(𝜌𝑎 − 𝜌𝑔 ) − 0.007578𝜌𝑔 √ ; 𝐾 = 2.7 (𝐵𝑟𝑖𝑐𝑘 𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑎𝑙)
𝑄2
 45

5
0.007578(0.548)𝑉 2
𝐷30 = 2.7(1.184 − 0.548) − 1
84.762

5
𝐷30 = 1.7172 − 4.5107 𝑥 10−4 𝑉 2

Chimney Height:

𝑑𝑟𝑒𝑞
ℎ=
𝐷30

2.00 − 0.002192𝑉 2
ℎ= 5 𝑥 30 𝑚 [𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1]
1.7172 − 4.5107 𝑥 10−4 𝑉 2

Inside Chimney Diameter:

4𝑄2 𝑄2 84.76
𝑑𝑖 = √ = 1.13√ = 1.13√
𝜋𝑉 𝑉 𝑉

1
𝑑𝑖 = 10.4034𝑉 −2 [𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2]

Chimney Specifications:

Assuming that the velocity is the same as the air inlet velocity, 𝑉 = 𝑉1 = 21.19 𝑚/𝑠,

2.00 − 0.002192(21.19)2
𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 1: ℎ = 5 𝑥 30 𝑚
1.7172 − 4.5107 𝑥 10−4 (21.19)2

ℎ = 38.83 𝑚

1
𝐹𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 2: 𝑑𝑖 = 10.4034(21.19)−2

𝑑𝑖 = 2.26 𝑚

Therefore, the height and inner diameter of the chimney are 38.83 m and 2.26 m,

respectively.
 46

REFERENCES

Cengel, Y. (2006). Introduction to Thermodynamics and Heat Transfer. 2 nd Edition. The

McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Engineering Toolbox (2001). Tools and Basic Information for Design, Engineering and

Construction of Technical Applications. Retrieved from https://www.engineering

toolbox.com/

Henan Zoomjo. Zoomjo - China Mining Machinery Production and Export Base. Retrieved

from http://www.zoomjomac.com/

Landis E. R. et. al. (1985). Introducing Coal-Water-Mix Fuels to the Philippines Assessment

of Project Feasibility. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey.

Morse, F. (1953). Power Plant Engineering in MKS Units. Litton Educational Publishing, Inc.

Potter, P. (1959). Power Plant Theory and Design. 2nd Edition of Steam Power Plants. The

Ronald Press Company.

San Francisco Water District. Water Analysis and Laboratory Rates. Retrieved from https://

sfwd.gov.ph/services-and-rates/water-analysis-and-laboratory-rates/